Hal Houle
- Thread starter eze
- Start date
From what I could establish, the cue goes to this position parallel to the CTE line, so that would infer that the bridge pivot is 1 1/8th inch from the CTE line too. But the focus is on the tip placement, not the bridge placement as I understand.Patrick Johnson said:
Colin
Edit: It would appear I had misunderstood Hal and Hal had misunderstood me when I asked about this. The tip placement 1 1/8th is independent of the bridge position. It is just the point from where the tip is pivoted to the center of the CB.
Last edited:
I will give an answer based on the diagram and not from a pooltable with cue in hand.
Outside pivot, outside pivot, inside pivot and another inside pivot possibly with an adjustment.
Then there's PRO ONE......for a righty, left to right most of the time for all the above shots....with an adjustment for the toughest cut.
Good luck.......Stan
Outside pivot, outside pivot, inside pivot and another inside pivot possibly with an adjustment.
Then there's PRO ONE......for a righty, left to right most of the time for all the above shots....with an adjustment for the toughest cut.
Good luck.......Stan
stan shuffett said:
Stan, when an adjustment is required does the system dictate how much of an adjustment and how to make the adjustment, or is that up to the player?
pj
chgo
stan shuffett said:
Thanks Stan for answering. Did you click to see page two? The balls are all in the same position relative to the cueball and one another. The only thing that has changed is the entire setup has shifted slightly counterclockwise on an unshifted table. So the balls won't go in the pocket using the same pivots you mentioned were required to make them on page one.
That is, unless there are adjustments to your pivots to account for the new arrangement.
center to edge
Bluepepper,
This is where so much of the diagramming and math seems to go to hell. You seem to have simply rotated the whole ball and line diagram assembly. What you fail to account for is that center to edge is no longer the same starting point on page two as it was in page one. You have to redo page two placing the balls in the new position and finding the new center to edge line instead of using the same point on the object ball. As I said much earlier in this thread, the diagrams and proofs miss the fact that center to edge is a constantly changing starting point which is in my opinion why many of these systems work far better than I would think they should when I take a superficial look at them. They are largely self correcting. Not entirely, but largely.
Hu
bluepepper said:
Bluepepper,
This is where so much of the diagramming and math seems to go to hell. You seem to have simply rotated the whole ball and line diagram assembly. What you fail to account for is that center to edge is no longer the same starting point on page two as it was in page one. You have to redo page two placing the balls in the new position and finding the new center to edge line instead of using the same point on the object ball. As I said much earlier in this thread, the diagrams and proofs miss the fact that center to edge is a constantly changing starting point which is in my opinion why many of these systems work far better than I would think they should when I take a superficial look at them. They are largely self correcting. Not entirely, but largely.
Hu
ShootingArts said:
Hu, I'm a fan of your insightful posts, but I think you're mistaken here. What I'm pointing out in the diagram on page two is that these Houle and possibly Stan center-to-edge methods teach only one or two pivots, while the center-to-edge visual alignment and reference for cue placement remains the same. Page two shows the same center-to-edge line as it showed on page one. If the system says that all shots can be made with only 2 pivots, and hence only 2 bridge positions, how can the shots on page 2 be made in the same pocket as those on page 1?
If I'm misinterpreting your post, an illustration would be very helpful. Thanks
BP,bluepepper said:
Not all proponents say that is how it works. That's part of the difficulty.
Geometry plainly shows us that many bridge positions relative to the CTE line are required. The pivot, CB and OB are basically joined geometrically. There's no way of twisting them without curving cues and cue balls.
The key question, I think, is how does the technique get their bridge to where it needs to be. That technique changes for different levels. Some explanations don't make sense. Others suggest there may even be an aspect of feel involved, such that the player just learns to see the required aim line and gets good at setting up the pivot toward that.
I'm not sure, but I think that is the key area to explore. The fact is, while CTE systems appear to be, and are often described as a kind of geometric system, it hasn't been presented purely geometrically. Not in any way that us geometry heads can comprehend anyway.
In the Stan thread he mentioned different bridge positions being required for different angles. Hal says they are all the same. I don't think it is Hal's concern. It is the geometer's concern. So maybe Hal doesn't really grasp the geometry? I dunno. It is hard to work out the system from his, or anyone else's verbal or written descriptions.
Colin
There's a couple of pivots and 2 mirroring bridge positions. I could make a case for only 1 bridge position, the one that takes you to center CB each time using the same technique shot after shot. Stan
A CB and OB in the middle of the table (away from each other) can initially result into 4 distinct shots using the system. There's a thick and a thin shot on each side of the objectball. It depends on the pivot. Some of the shots go and some may not. So there are 4 bridge locations for that particular CB/OB relationship. There is one technique that takes you to each bridge location. I have tried to give some useful insights to this approach of aiming. Stan
Last edited:
ridingthenine21
Registered
stan shuffett said:
So are there 2 bridge positions for each side or just one for each side? I am confused because you said a couple of posts up there are two bridge positions that mirror each other.
Experienced players use adjustment techniques superbly.The techniques are learned and are very specific. Hal will tell you.....banks are iffy...extreme cuts are iffy.... using a lot of spin is iffy...... Play safe. **Let the other guy make the mistake. Adjustments have their limits......Stan
The thick and thin pivot are the same, technique-wise. Each objectball has a distinct edge that relates to the CB's exact center axis. (In fact, an OB has 360 edges.) One objectball edge represents 2 shots, one from an inside pivot and the other from an outside pivot.
Last edited:
Bluepepper, Page 2
Balls 1 and 2 go easily with inside pivot to right pocket.
Balls 3 and 4.. just play 'em in the left corner.
But if you must go to right with #3 ball...just move from inside pivot across center of CB for a little extra spin....that's one way.....but iffy
Ball 4....look @ center to edge and go to shot aim seeing center to edge...maintain that visual and apply spin with an angled cue, easily done using outside spin.... the CTE visual will adjust slightly away from the OB's edge.........a great technique good for one-pocket type shots...
Balls 1 and 2 go easily with inside pivot to right pocket.
Balls 3 and 4.. just play 'em in the left corner.
But if you must go to right with #3 ball...just move from inside pivot across center of CB for a little extra spin....that's one way.....but iffy
Ball 4....look @ center to edge and go to shot aim seeing center to edge...maintain that visual and apply spin with an angled cue, easily done using outside spin.... the CTE visual will adjust slightly away from the OB's edge.........a great technique good for one-pocket type shots...
Last edited:
